2012 Report on Cms in North America

CMS

Distribution: General CONVENTION ON UNEP/CMS/COP11/Inf.40 MIGRATORY 25 September 2014

SPECIES Original: English 11th MEETING OF THE CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES Quito, Ecuador, 4-9 November 2014 Agenda Item 12.2

2012 REPORT ON CMS IN NORTH AMERICA

For reasons of economy, documents are printed in a limited number, and will not be distributed at the Meeting. Delegates are requested to bring their copy to the meeting and not to request additional copies.

Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals

Secretariat provided by the United Nations Environment Programme

2012 Report on CMS in North America (Washington, D.C).

Contents

I. Introduction & Background

II. Overview of Accomplishments Goal 1:Mobilize Resources for CMS Goal 2: Raise Awareness and Understanding aboutCMS Goal 3: Build Political Support for CMS in the U.S. Goal 4: Partnership Development and Engagement Goal 5: General Support to CMS Secretariat

III. Conclusion: Strategic Directions and Next Steps for 2013

Appendix 1: Detailed List of Resource Mobilization Efforts Appendix 2: List of Outreach/Organizations Contacted Appendix 3: Outreach and Networking Activities Appendix 4: Partnerships and Collaboration

I INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND

This report outlines the CMS Washington Officer’srole, activities and accomplishments over the first year, 2012.

The CMS Washington post was discussed at the 10 th Conference of the Parties (COP10). In Resolution 10.1, Parties expressed concern about the recruitment of the officer and instructed the Standing Committee to review, at its 40th Meeting, fundraising income generated by the post, and not renew it if it does not yield income equal to at least two times the annual salary allocated in the budget, and to transfer the 2013-2014 salary costs to the Trust Fund. The Washington Officer must, therefore, have raised two times the annual salary being Euro 42,500, the equivalent of approximately $110,000.

With a United States (U.S.)contribution of $100,000 in 2012, in addition to the $100,000 that was already pledged by the US Government at the donors’ meeting at the margins ofCOP10, this means thata total of $200,000 was received from the US State Department, via the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), for the implementation of the Sharks MOU. The target set by COP for continuation of the post was almostachieved by the extra $100,000 received.

Funding proposals submitted in 2012 (to the Western Hemisphere Migratory Species Initiative (WHMSI) for ~$70,000, and to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for ~$205,000) are still awaiting, hopefully, positive results.

UNEP/CMS Secretariat *UN Campus *Platz der VereintenNationen 1 * 53113 Bonn, Germany Tel (+49 228) 815 2401 * Fax (+49 228) 815 2449 * E-mail: [email protected] * Website: www.cms.int It is noted that other funding opportunities(as detailed later in this report) were pursued, however without success. Further, in-kind support from non-governmental organizations resulting from informal solicitations by the Officer usually goes directly to partner organizations’ activities and is difficult to measure as dollars raised by the Washington Officer. However, these efforts have all been useful in promoting CMS in the region.

Why Washington, DC and UNEP/RONA?

Washington, D.C. is the capital of the United States and the seat of the American federal government. A Washington presence (the Washington Officer) helps CMS gain access to U.S. government agencies, such as the Agency for International Development, Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the Forest Service (USFS) to name a few. All have international conservation programs and some already support CMS and have potential to provide much more support for CMS activities in the future.

Washington is,in addition,the headquarters of many inter-governmental organizations, foundations, scientific and academic institutions, major corporations, influential international NGOs and international bodies like the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Organization of American States, and the Global Environment Facility. Having the Washington Officer posted here provides CMS with access to these organizations and to representatives who visit from around the world.The Officer engages with these representatives at meetings, workshops and specialevents, and thus helpspromote the mission of CMS both globally and regionally.

The Future Vision as described in the CMS Strategic Plan 2006-2014 is ‘A world which understands, respects and sustains the phenomenon of animal migration as a unique part ofour shared natural heritage’ . Bringing major countries like the U.S., Canada and Mexico on as parties to CMS to share in that strategic vision would be a helpful way to support the implementation of the CMS Strategic Plan globally. To achieve this goal, CMS needs to raise awareness about its mission, increase understanding about its programs and family of agreements, and build trusted working relationships across both governmental and non- governmental organizations in North America. This goal has not and cannot be successfully achieved solely from Bonn. Regular, in-person contact is needed to achieve such a vision.

UNEP and a number of other UN organizations recognize the importance of having an office or representative in Washington.

A significant plus is the strategic location of this Officerin UNEP’s Regional Office for North America (RONA) which helps to align CMS more closely with UNEP regional activities. RONA’s Regional Director has advised CMS Washington-based consultants in the past (2008-2010), is very supportive of CMS activities in the region and helps CMS in high level political debates with the Washington Officer paving the way for such appearances.

In addition to promoting and raising awareness about CMS, and building partnerships with Washington-based entities, the Washington Officer helps to manage the relationship between CMS, the CMS Family, other MEAs and the UNEP regional office, as called for in CMS Resolution 10.9 (Activities2 and 8) of the Future Shape document.

2 Benefits of Sharing Officerwith UNEP and Description of Duties

The CMS North American Focal Pointis a P2 levelofficershared evenly between CMS and UNEP RONA (i.e. this is a half-timeofficerfor CMS).

For CMS, the Officerraises the visibility of CMS in North America and helps build political support for the Convention whilstalso mobilizing resources for the implementation of CMS resolutions.For RONA, the Officerfulfills activities under UNEP’s ecosystem management sub-programme, currently coordinated in UNEP through the Division of Environment and Policy Implementation (DEPI) by Elizabeth Mrema, CMS Acting Executive Secretary.

Previously, part-timeconsultants have served as North Americanfocal points for CMS and were based at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) headquarters. However, they lacked day-to-day supervision, a senior CMS or UNEP official to support them liaising with the U.S. authorities, and connection with the CMS Family. UNEP’s Regional Director provides day-to-day supervision of the current Officer, and the co-location has the added benefit of sharing office spacewith other UNEP staff, including GEF’s Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel (STAP), the UNEP Division of Environment and Policy Implementation and the UNEP Division on Early Warning and Assessment. Such proximity facilitatesinformation exchange across GEF programs and with UNEPas a whole.For example, the Officer attended the GEF STAP bi-annual meeting, provided comments on a STAP technical report, and made informal recommendations to the GEF 6 Formulation. In her RONA capacity, the Officer also attended a 3-day GEF familiarization training which will benefit future CMS GEF proposals as well as relationship building and implementation of CMS Resolution 10.25 (Enhancing Engagement with the Global Environment Facility) related to future GEF funding and conservation of migratory species.

Other benefits of officer-sharing include overlapping portfolios whereby CMS activities dovetail withUNEP’s Programme of Work. For example, for RONA, the Officer coordinates activities for the CBD Spain-UNEP LifeWeb project on the conservation of marine mammal areas in the Eastern Pacific and Wider Caribbean region. This simultaneously connects CMS to this project and with countries in that region. One specific activity is the development of a new, regional network to connect marine mammal experts/managers all along the North and South East Pacificmarine mammal corridors. CMS may potentially provide a useful institutional framework under which to form this network. Although several countries in the region are already contracting Parties to CMS there is still quite a number that have not joined, and through this project CMS is promoted which could lead to more accessions in the near future.

II Overview of Accomplishments

In year one (2012), the Washington Officer’s major goals and activities were focused on building support for CMS in the U.S.

Major goals for year one included to assist with:

1) Mobilizing Resources for CMS; 2) Raising awareness and understanding about CMS;

3 3) Building political support for CMS in the U.S.; 4) Engaging partners and exploring new partnership opportunities; and 5) Providing general support to CMS.

Details of accomplishments are provided under those goals below.

Goal One: Mobilize Resources for CMS

Fundraising Approach

Raising fundsfrom North America for the implementation of CMS at the regional and global level is a major component of the Washington Officer’s duties. A two-track approach has been taken to fundraising. One track has been to seek support for CMS core activities as well as for the coordination and implementation of CMS instruments. The second track has been to identify funding (both direct and in-kind) for activities to support migratory species conservation in CMS party countries.

In both tracks, the first step to fundraising requires familiarizing prospective donors with the goals and objectives of CMS. The second step is to build trusted relationships and identify areas of mutual interest for directing funds, hence, a significant initial emphasis on education and outreach (as described in Section II). Activities in the first year have focussed on identifying prospective donors, exchanging information about respective portfolios and building the necessary relationships and networks to support these goals.

Although the U.S. is not a party to CMS, in 2012 it contributed significantly to the implementation of several key CMS Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) to which it is signatory, including: the Indian Ocean South-East Asian Marine Turtle MOU (IOSEA), the MOU on the Conservation of Migratory Sharks, and most recently this year, the MOU on the Conservation of Cetaceans and their Habitats in the Pacific Island Region (PIC MOU).

With its jurisdictional authority for these marine-related MOUs, NOAA is one of the primary agencies with which the Washington Officer liaises. Together, the Officer (a former NOAA employee)andthe CMS Officer in Charge, have held multiple formal meetings with U.S. State Department and NOAA senior staff to advocate for additional support to implement thesemarine MOUs.

In2012 the U.S. contributeda second $100,000 grant to support the implementation of theSharksMOU, above and beyond the $100,000 they had already contributed in 2011. Through on-going exchanges, both formal and informal, the WashingtonOfficer isstill in discussions withthe U.S.about considering making this an annual contribution, with encouraging prospects. Other on-going discussions include raising funding and/or political support for sea turtles, seabirds andthe Agreement for the Conservation of Albatross and Petrels (ACAP), cetaceans, and for addressing othermarine threats (e.g. by-catch, underwater noise and marine litter).

4 The table below summarizes the target and the funds generated to date with the assistance of the Washington Officer in 2012:

Year One Funds Raised Funds Pursued Fundraising Target (for Sharks MOU) (awaiting results)

$110,000 $100,000 WHMSI: ~$70,000 USFWS: ~$205,000

In terms of the second track of the fundraising approach, the Officer has focused on identifying support (both direct funding and in-kind)for the implementation of CMS migratory species conservation activities generally. This includesidentifying and relayingfunding opportunitiesand prospects for CMS and its Parties to the CMS Secretariat. As a result, in 2012, eight applications were submitted by the CMS Secretariat or partnersto the USFWS Multinational Species Conservation Grant Funds and to the Western Hemisphere Migratory Species Initiative (WHMSI). Proposal details can be found as part of Appendix 1.

The Multinational Species Conservation Grants administered by the USFWS benefit projects conserving African and Asian elephants, rhinos, great apes and marine turtles in their natural habitats. In 2010, over $13.6 million was awarded for 216 projects around the globe.

The Western Hemisphere Migratory Species Initiative (WHMSI) in 2012 made $100,000 worth of grant funding available to support small marine mammals; sharks and rays; large marine mammals; coral reefs and mangroves; and beaches within the Western Hemisphere.

U.S. Foundations

Some U.S. Foundations have also been approached to begin identifying possible matches between CMS activities and Foundation grant interests and guidelines. Grant applications are often solicited by ‘invitation-only’ after a pre-screen or letter of inquiry. Relationship building is therefore a critical pre-requisite.

Foundations that have been approached include the Packard Foundation, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF), Ocean Foundation, JRS Foundation and the MacArthur Foundation. Two applications were submitted in 2012 - one to the MacArthur Foundation and one to the JRS Foundation. The Washington Officer made a presentation to five fund directors at NFWF with prospects for CMS interests to be integrated into 2012 grant guidelines and priorities.

A fundraising strategy for approaching private foundations is being developed. The first step was the production of information material to help reach out to Foundations withby-invitation- only proposals.

Non-governmental Partner Organizations

In addition to soliciting government funds, the Washington Officer has initiated discussions aboutin-kind support from numerous non-governmental partner organizations (and prospective partners)in the U.S. These includedthe PEW Environment Group, National

5 Geographic Society, World Wildlife Fund, Humane Society International, International Fund for Animal Welfare, IUCN, and Wildlife Conservation Society, to name a few. A list of organizations contacted can be found in Appendix 2.

Such in-kind support may include staff time or technical support for migratory species research and monitoring activities, satellite mapping, spatial planning, resource manager training programs, management plan improvements, and general implementation of various CMS Resolutions and Species Action Plans.

As a rule, major non-governmental organizations prefer funding on-the-ground activities and enabling localcommunity organizations rather than channelling funding through the CMSSecretariat in Bonn. Thus, understanding each NGO’s mission and priorities is critical in order to tailor prospective CMS activities to their interests. The support resulting from informal solicitations usually goes directly to partner organizations’ activities and to shaping mission priorities on the ground. It is difficult to measure these successes as dollars raised by the Washington Officer directly, but they do contribute to NGOs and conservation activities.

Goal Two: Raise Awareness and Understanding about CMS

Background

Awareness of CMS and its family of agreements is limited inWashington, D.C. –making it challenging to obtain support for the Convention without first enhancingunderstanding of CMS. The U.S. has a large and complex political system whereby each of the fiftyStates has its own laws and can have its own positionon certain issues, particularly the environment.

Inan effort to build interest in CMS and its activities, the Washington Officer engaged in a rigorous outreach strategy involving network building and communications throughout the year – all aimed at relaying the achievements and the benefits of supporting CMS.Some examples of these activities are scoped below and details are provided in Appendix 3.

Outreach & Regional Network Building Efforts

The Washington Officer’s existing professional network together with that of the UNEP RONA Regional Director have helped CMS to successfully connect with senior staff at major governmental and non-governmental organizations across Washington. In her first year, the Washington Officer engaged with over 50 non-governmental organizations, 8 Federal Agencies, 5 Congressional Offices, and over 500 individuals through NGO roundtables, formal presentations, bilateral meetings, and informal interactions at events (some of these organizations are listed in Appendix 2).

As part of the outreach messages, the Officer encourages U.S. support for CMS activities and instruments, making the case that CMS can serve as a neutral platform to help connect countries all along the migratory routes of endangered species from North America, down to Latin America, to the Caribbean and across the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans (e.g. sea turtles, cetaceans, seabirds and sharks).Effective outreach and network building is a critical step to pursue eventual ratification of CMS by the U.S. or Canada.

To help keep track of the many contacts made, a regional database was created along with an email list for CMS outreach efforts.The Officer shares CMS Bulletins and Web Releases

6 with North American networks. Overall, having aCMS presence in Washington has helped to increase the interaction between U.S. organizations on the topic of migratory species conservation activities.Some specific achievements are listed in Appendix 3.

Representational Role

The Washington Officer attended key meetings in the region on behalf of CMS to reduce travel costs for the Secretariat. Some meetings attended are also listed in Appendix 3.

Communications Support to CMS

In addition to specific North American outreach activities, the Officer also provided useful communications support whichincluded theproduction of CMS Factsheets tailored to a U.S. audience, the preparation of North American contentfor the CMS website; writing of articles for CMS bulletins , and providing material for powerpoint presentations and press releases.

The Officer also relayed relevant news stories from North American media to CMS Bonn and facilitated the sharing of CMS News Releases to North America via RONA’s website and itsNorth American civil society distribution list, in cooperation with RONA’s Communications Unit.

Goal Three: Build Political Support for CMS in the U.S.

Background

Building political will and support for an international conventionis challenging and difficult to measure. Engaging influential individuals and NGO networks around CMS interests and priorities must be strategic and requires a significant investment of time and energy to be successful. However, the return is that these stakeholders and NGOs then help to champion species issues on behalf of CMS.

Gaining access to political leaders and senior governmentofficials is in itself, a measure of success.The Washington Officer has managed to secure meetings with the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation and the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, all of which have some oversight over migratory species issues.

As discussed above, the Washington Officer also encourages the U.S. to sign CMS agreements and MOUs. Ratification of the Convention would require two-thirds or 67 votes of the 100 member U.S. Senate. Before that, it would require being included on the State Departments' List of Priority Treaties for Ratification.The Agreement for the Conservation of Albatross and Petrels (ACAP) remains on the U.S. State Department’s Priority List. If the U.S. accedes to ACAP, this would be the first legally binding instrument under CMS to which it would become a Party, and may also influence eventual accession to CMS.One of the priority tasks for the Washington Officer in 2013 is to promote ACAP on Capitol Hill.

Signs of Growing Political Support

The following points illustrate a growing political support for CMS in the U.S.

7 • NOAA/CMS Partnership: The Washington Officer successfully coordinated renewal of the NOAA/CMS Letter of Cooperation for 2013-2018.

• Pacific Islands Cetacean MOU: The U.S. sent a delegation to attend the Pacific Island Cetaceans MOU Meeting of Signatories in New Caledonia resulting in signature of theMOUin September 2012. Thismakes PIC the third MOU to which the U.S. is a signatory.The Washington Officer promoted exchanges between U.S. Government representatives (e.g. NOAA) and the CMS Marine Focal Point and the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP).

• SharksMOU : The U.S. has been a leading proponent of shark conservation as demonstrated by its engagement with the Shark Conservation Plan Drafting Committee andits active role at the Sharks Meeting of Signatories in Bonn in September 2012. As noted above, the U.S. contributed an additional $100,000 for implementation of the Sharks MOU in 2012.

• ACAP Ratification:ACAP remains on the U.S. Government’s list of Priority Treaties for Ratification. There is growing interest from Congress to support domestic ACAP legislation, in part due to the Officer’s efforts to recruit civil society champions for ACAP, including the Society for Conservation Biology, Audubon Society and Monterey Bay Aquarium.

• IOSEA : The U.S. remains very engaged in the CMS/IOSEA MOU as reflected by active meeting participation and ongoing monetary contributions to IOSEA ($120,000 in 2012).

• U.N. General Assembly Resolution (UNGA): Aninterventionby the U.S. Delegation included a first-time reference to CMS and the Sharks MOU and was supported by the EU and adopted by UNGA in December 2012.

• U.S. State Dept. Announcement on Wildlife Trafficking : In November 2012 U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, called for an end to illicit wildlife trafficking, which she emphasized as a major foreign policy and security issue.She called for a “concerted global response.” While not directly related to CMS, this high profile statement resulted in engagement of U.S. Embassies around the world and mobilization of major conservation NGOs on this issue (e.g. WWF unveiled a new campaign to “Stop Wildlife Crime”). This may have indirect benefits to highlighting the conservation goals of CMS as well, and the Officer is engaging with such initiatives.

Goal Four: Partnership DevelopmentandEngagement

While financial resources are scarce, acquiring in-kind support for CMS activities through partnerships with other organizations and leveraging technical, educational, or outreach support for CMS priorities is important. Partners help to achieve the CMS mission globally, by implementing CMS resolutions and species action plans on the ground.

The Washington Officer strengthenedexisting relationships (for example with Bat Conservation International, Birdlife International, Pew Environment Group, Wildlife Conservation Society, IUCN, Humane Society International) and metmany prospective new

8 partners (including the African Wildlife Foundation, Wild Aide, Oceanic Society, Marine Conservation Society, Association for Aquariums and Zoos). Opportunities for joint fundraising are also being explored.

The Washington Officer also met with key representatives of US Government agencies like the U.S.Agency for International Development (USAID),U.S. Department of Interior, U.S.Forest Service (USFS), USFWS, NOAA, and the Organization of American States(OAS), to start to identifysynergies. Maintaining and developing such relationshipsmay lead to more political support for the Convention, whichcannot be achieved by occasional visits by CMS Management.

As part of on-going outreach and partnership development efforts, the Officer has identified and facilitated linkages betweenCMS Secretariat staff and U.S. resource experts, managers and scientists from organizations around Washington.

Examples of potential partnerships and collaboration opportunities explored in 2012 are outlined in Appendix 4.

Goal Five: General Support to CMS Secretariat

The Washington Officer contributes regularlyto CMS Secretariat activities. This generally includes supporting implementation of various CMS Agreements and resolutions (e.g. ecological networks, climate change, marine debris, underwaternoise, PIC, Sharks MOU, ACAP and IOSEA). For example, the Officer was invited to review a report by CBD- GEF STAP (CBD Technical Series No.67) on “Impacts of Marine Debris on Marine Biodiversity”, and integrated references to CMS Resolution 10.4 (marine debris). This effort helped to promote joint collaboration between GEF STAP, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and CMS and influenced a positive decision by CBD COP11 to include marine debris in its portfolio.

Other types of general support included providing inputs to the futureCMS Strategic Plandevelopment process, updates to communications materials, and setting up meetings for the CMS Officer’s missions to Washington. The Officer also provided administrative and logistical support toCMS COP10 including the CMS Donors Dinner and facilitated organization of a side event on U.S. marine-related activities.

III Conclusion: Strategic Directions and Next Steps

2012 was a very busy year for the Washington Officer. Progress was made on a number of fronts as evidenced by growing political support from the U.S. for several important MOUs and continued engagement in CMS activities globally.

With the recent signing of the Pacific Island Cetaceans MOU in 2012, the U.S. is now a signatory to three CMS MOUs. U.S. engagementand financial support for the Sharks MOUsends a strong positive message,as does the listing of ACAP on theU.S. Priority Treaty RatificationList.

The overall climate is ripe for on-going engagement.

9 More promising partnership explorations are underway, for example with theU.S. Agency for International Development, Department of Interior and U.S. Forest Service.

Numerous contacts have been made throughoutthe conservation community and new opportunities for collaboration are under consideration, particularly with a vision to help develop and implement the future CMS Strategic Plan for Migratory Species (2015-2023).

To maintain this significantmomentum – with the ultimate goal of U.S. accession to CMS and increased revenue for implementing CMS agreements globally– efforts on outreach, networking, partnerships and fundraising need to continue unabated.

It is envisaged that the Washington Officer will capitalise on the growinginterest resulting from the contacts established in Year One, and achieve additional benefitsin years to come.

Appendix 1: Detailed List of Resource Mobilization Efforts

♦ USFWS Critically Endangered Animals Conservation Fund (CEACF) of the Wildlife Without Borders Program

a. CMS letter of support for the “Wild camel conservation in Mongolia: assessment of space and habitat in the Transaltai Gobi of Southern Mongolia”, proposal of the Research Institute of Wildlife Ecology, Vienna, Total: $25,000 (result awaited). b. CMS proposal on “Monitoring, wardening and awareness-raising on the critically endangered Northern Bald Ibis during autumn 2012 migration in Saudi Arabia”, Total: $23,165 (result awaited). c. CMS letter of support provided for the “Developing corridors or protection zones for ‘Endangered’ humpback whales, blue whales, and sei whales within Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands” proposal of the international Migratory Wildlife Network. Total: $24,350 (result awaited).

♦ USFWS African Elephant Conservation Fund

a. Proposal submitted by the Migratory Wildlife Network: “Progressing delivery of coordinated habitat protection for West African elephants in Ghana, Burkina Faso and Togo.” Total $133,567 (result awaited).

♦ Western Hemisphere Migratory Species Initiative (WHMSI): Marine Grants Fund 4proposals with letters of support from CMS, including 2from Brazil related to the Sharks MOU and its Conservation Plan and 2which were originally received as CMS Small Grants Fund applicants as listed below (~$70,000) (result awaited).

a. “A Multilingual Guide to Identification of Sharks and Rays of the Atlantic Ocean” part of a training kit, submitted by São Paulo State University, Brazil. Total Request: $20,000. b. Translation of the Book “ Actions to Conserve Sharks and Rays in Southern Brazil” for the purpose of sharing information for conservation. Submitted by Instituto Augusto Carneiro, Brazil. Total Requested: $10,700. c. “Monitoring of shorebirds at Bahia Samboronbon in Argentina” Total: $19,982. d. “Surveys of migratory species at Isla Guafo in Chile” Total $19,236.

♦ JRS Foundation Grant CMS submitted a proposal to the called “Enhancing accessibility and interoperability of migratory species information for conservation; an analytical tool to complement CMS Family Online Reporting System.” Total: $200,000 (not successful in first round, but considered for the next one).

♦ MacArthur Foundation Grant CMS submitted a letter of support of the Bolivian Scientific Council member’s proposal on “Strengthening the management of two adjacent protected areas and a proposal for a wetland of international importance in Beni, Bolivia.” Total: $300,000 (not successful).

♦ CMS nominated Ms. Sonja Fordham, Shark Advocates InternationalPresident and CMS supporter, for the Pew Fellows Program, for an award of $100,000 which she would have used to implement CMS shark conservation goals(the nomination was accepted, and although not successful, was a finalist and the Secretariat was advised to consider re- submitting the nomination in 2013)

Appendix 2: List of Outreach/Organizations Contacted

I. US Administration U.S. Senate Environment & Public Works Committee U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee (Co-Chaired by Senator John Kerry) U.S. Agency for International Development-Biodiversity Unit U.S. Department of Commerce/ National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Interior--U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service U.S. Forest Service--International Programs U.S. Marine Mammal Commission U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation U.S. State Dept-Bureau of Oceans, Envt& Science, Office of Marine Conservation U.S. State Department—Bureau of Oceans, Environment & Science, Office of Ecology & Conservation

II. NGO Community African Wildlife Foundation National Geographic Society American Bird Conservancy Natural Resources Defense Animal Welfare Institute Council Audubon Society Ocean Conservancy Bat Conservation International Oceana Birdlife International Pew Environment Group Conservation International Sargasso Sea Alliance Defenders of Wildlife Sea TurtleConservancy Endangered Species Coalition Shark Advocates International Environmental Defense Fund Smithsonian Research Institute Humane Society International Society for Conservation Biology Inter-Am Sea Turtle Conservancy The Nature Conservancy International Fund for Animal Welfare TRAFFIC North America International Union for Wild Aid Conservation of Nature Wildlife Conservation Society Marine Conservation Institute World Wildlife Fund

III. Associations & Coalitions Association of Zoos& Aquariums Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies U.S. Species Coalition Endangered Species Coalition Ocean Champions International Conservation Caucus Foundation

IV. Inter-governmental Institutions Commission for Environmental Cooperation Global Environment Facility (GEF) GEF/Science & Technical Advisory Panel Organization of American States Inter-American Development Bank United Nations Development Program World Bank-Global Partnership on Oceans

V. Foundations National Fish & Wildlife Foundation MacArthur Foundation Packard Foundation The Ocean Foundation Wallace Global Fund Walton Family Foundation

12 Appendix 3: Outreach and Networking Activities

Outreach & Regional Network Building Efforts

Some specific achievements included:

• Organized Successful Washington Missions for CMS Officer in Charge to meet with senior leadership from U.S. Government and non-governmental organizations and promote CMS (February and November 2012). Thirteen meetings (~40 people) and two well attended roundtable presentations were held in November. In February, twenty-four meetings (~40 people) and one roundtable presentation were arranged, helping to raise visibility of CMS in Washington.

• Coordinated 3 NGO Roundtable Presentations to provide an overview of CMS and discuss engagement opportunities for the U.S. One was concentrated on CMS marine activities while another was focused on CMS terrestrial and avian activities. UNEP RONA hosted two of the roundtables with another hosted by USFS.

• Congressional Briefing on Migratory Species Conservation: In Partnership with the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA), the Washington Officer organized a high-level panel briefing for U.S. Congressional staff which featured speakers from the Wildlife Conservation Society, Association of Fish and Game Agencies, CMS and Smithsonian National Research Institute. There was full room attendance.

• Presented at North American Congress for Conservation Biology (NACCB) . At request of and with the support of the Secretariat, the Washington Officer delivered a CMS presentation on ecological networks and met with conservation biology experts from around North America.

• Promoted Year of the Bat Campaign to support CMS Secretariat, searched for additional funding resources while also arranging exchange of website links on relevant organization websites. Arranged for information exchange with the Association of Zoos and Aquariums Annual Members Meeting (6,000+members).

• Presented Update on CMS to U.S. Multinational Species Coalition: Hosted the quarterly coalition meeting at UNEP RONA offices and made a presentation on CMS activities. The coalition consists of 22 environmental NGOs working to promote support for the Multilateral Species Conservation Act on Capitol Hill - the Act through which annual appropriations for USFWS Grants are made.

• Networking Events : Attended numerous special events hosted by area NGOs, e.g. Audubon Society, USFWS, ICCF, IUCN, Pew Oceans, Endangered Species Coalition, National Geographic, WWF, to name a few.

Representational Role:

Some meetings attended included:

• World Bank Global Partnership on Oceans: First Meeting of Interested Partners in Washington to represent CMS interests.

13 • Sixteenth meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (CBD-SBSTTA 16): Presented onOcean Noise andMarine Debris (Montreal, May 2012) to highlight CMS Resolutions 10.4 (marine debris) and 10.14 (by-catch) adopted at COP10. Networked with CBD staff, government representatives and UNEP participants to promote CMS interests.

• World Bank Climate Investment Funds: Attended invite-only Governance Meeting on wind power investment strategies to represent CMS interests in migratory birds and flyways.

• GEF STAP Bi-Annual Meeting: Attended and listened to new GEF CEO and STAP Focal Area experts share strategic vision and priorities for the GEF 6 Formulation.

• Western Hemisphere Migratory Species Initiative (WHMSI): Met quarterly with Director of International Conservation Division at USFWS and Co-Chair of WHMSI to exchange programmatic information and updates. Assisted with marine grant RFP preparation.

• International Conservation Caucus Foundation (ICCF): Attended invite-only ICCF events including Congressional Hearing on “Global Poaching Crisis”; Congressional Diplomatic Briefing on “Migratory Bird Joint Ventures” and the annual U.S. Congressional Conservation Gala.

• WWF Fuller Symposium on Conservation Crime andWildlife Trafficking : Attended full day symposium with high profile keynote speakers overviewing issues of illegal trade and trafficking, hosted by the National Geographic Society.

14 Appendix 4: Partnerships and Collaboration

Examples of potential partnerships and collaboration opportunities included:

• CBD Spain-UNEP LifeWeb Marine Mammal Project: The Washington Officer identified and pursued links between the LifeWeb Project and CMS interests in expanding the CMS presence in the Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) region. The Officer presented an overview of CMS activities and relevant legal framework to 22 governments and stakeholders across the LAC region as part of the LifeWeb Regional Workshop in Panama.

• World Bank--Global Partnership on Oceans (GPO). This is a growing alliance of over 100 governments, international organizations, civil society groups, and private sector interests that will mobilize knowledge and financial resources to address threats to ocean health, resilience and productivity. The Washington Officer represented CMS at a meeting to define priorities and a strategic work plan for GPO and to explore benefits of CMS partnership to the growing Alliance, which may include future access to funding resources. The Officer made interventions to include in situ species values when calculating overall ocean values (e.g. sharks, cetaceans, sea turtles).

• Support for Sharks MOU : The Officer coordinated a small meeting with key NGOs, (HSI, IFAW, Shark Advocates International, Defenders) to collect feedback on implementation of the Shark Conservation Plan together with the CMS Officer in Charge. One outcome was a CMS Statement of Interest presented at the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) RFMO meeting in Philippines to remind WCPFC Parties of commitments made under CMS to promote shark conservation goals. Building support from these key shark conservation groups can help to promote more support and action from the U.S. Government as well.

Liaison Role

Examples of outreach and partnership development efforts included:

• National Geographic Society (NGS) Critter Cam : The Officer met with the senior vice president of NGS research and exploration programs to explore collaboration opportunities. NGS agreed to share Critter Cam footage with CMS to support education and outreach goals, particularly in CMS party countries. • WWF: Exchanged strategic plans for cetaceans and sea turtles and invited WWF to participate in the CMS Working Group for By-catch, in support of CMS Resolution 10.14 (by-catch). • WWF Mekong Dolphin Workshop: Facilitated a request for CMS to partner in WWF’s workshop in Cambodia. Outcomes included participation of top international cetacean experts and signing of the Kratie Declaration to further political and institutional commitments in the region. Explored Cambodia’s interest in CMS accession. • U.S. Forest Service International: Introduced the CMS Birds of Prey MOU Coordinator to explore shared interests in Raptors capacity building work in the Middle East. Also introduced the Acting Executive Secretary of AEWA to explore possibilities for cooperation on conservation of migratory waterbirds in Northern Africa and the Middle-East.

15 • Connected USFWS Climate Specialist to theCMS Climate Working Group to provide and exchange of best practices on addressing climate change and migratory species issues using case studies from North America. • Packard Foundation: Facilitated discussion with the ACAP Executive Secretary about programmatic linkages on seabird by-catch reduction and mitigation measures, with hopes of identifying funding opportunities from Packard. • SEAMAM III Workshop: Facilitated an exchange between SEAMAM coordinators and the CMS Secretariat to explore the possibility for CMS support, resulting in a favorable response and production of a future CMS Technical Series report, as well as offering potential for an increased CMS presence in SE Asia region.